The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1887-09-21

ing Tor the ADVERTISER we Il
say, we take this statement con
corning Mr. Lockwood not "bctrny-
ing II secrets" with many grains
of allowance. L fyou be not guilty
Of these vile methods, then give
your readers moro than Il bald do
NAL. Prove your methods pure.
Suppose just for the sake o%fchangc,
instead of''you'r another" or hurl-
Ing back the charge, suppose YOU
change Your style for once and tell
how you got this secret.
Declining to discuss further the
subject which WAS tho ostcnsible
cause ofthis attack, YOU have en-
denvorcd to draw us into an old
matter between Yourself and Mr. II.
III. Young. When shown by a
sworn statement of tho author that
we had no connection with that
matter, scorning argument and re-
jecting reason, you run rough-shod
over wnr statements, YOU pledge
yourself to believe that which has
bcon branded an famous faIshood.
And why" Because, 1st the state
mcnt was sworn to, and md
imagined that we appeared cIn-
barrasscd. NauIting vanity has
conjured in yourdistortcd imagina-
ton some conspiracy, which other
people know has never existed, and
with the slogan ring" YOU have
begun this unwarranted warfare.
But tho question is asked, what
does the affidavit prove? In an
swcr to this we think it o a
great deal. 1t proves conclusive
~ that when you charged those ar
ticlcsto n "ring," you made charge
which you could not prove, because
1t WAS false. That, when in an
swcr to tho question rs to what was
meant by the cry Of "rIng" YOU
said to TIE ADVERTISER: "Thou
art the man," you made a charge
against us, malicious as it was
false, and as totally unsubstanti-
ated rs any charge YOU could have
made. 1t proves moreover, that
you have received the secrets of
this office SurrcptitiousIy, your in
timation to tho contrary notwith-
starding. These are the positive
facts, proved by Mr. Ioungs state
ment; while Your whole course. in
making an attack upon our review
OF the Murray Bill, and then at
tempting to drag us into a totally
disconnected matter, between your.
self and Mr. Young, provcs you ma
lice towards TIE ADVERTISER.
You arc mad. Mad, because this
paper did not "turn up its toes and
die" as you predicted it would.
While TIE ADVERTISER was vet
an infant, one week old, YOU pub
llShcd an editorial which showed
your disposition'towards the paper.
O showed then that YOU would
attempt, by any mothod, to break
down II paper that would dare to
break our sweet monopol, ofjour-
nal m IN Laurcns County. You
gave in that article, headed ais the
Newspaper business Ovcrdone,"
the sad fate which awaited our
venture. After decryinS "patcnt
outaidcS," and giving II pcn-pic-
turc ofTnE ADVERTISER as II an
peared to you, this was given as
our doom: "Aftcr n few weeks O,
"poNsibly months, of miserable OK
"istcnce, the little mongrcl turns
up its toes. 1t is dead
R"t TIE ADVERTISER did NOT
die, and tho more we didn't die
tho more furious YOU became,
fin1ing the cry of patent outside"
OF no avail, you then made n tira-
de against "platc-mattcr."
Your chagrin, at witnessing fall
ture stamped upon each successive
attempt to injurc tho business OF
TINS paper, was complcto; and
when tho "littlo mongreI" which
you confidently predicted would
turn up its toes, dared to opposed II
Dill which you, the great "Senior
Editor" championcl in the halls OF
legislation, and which you attemp-